Stephen Harper is not a nice man!

[Argus]

Watched a clip on the news tonight featuring Ken Dryden. You might remember him as a hockey player who then retired and has been making money as a pretend MP ever since. I can't, for the life of me, remember him actually ever doing or accomplishing anything or saying anything of note since elected, but never mind. There he was on stage, talking in an oh-so-earnest voice about Stephan Harper, and he said "We've been watching Stephen Harper for more than two years now, and if there's one thing we've come to understand, with his arts cuts and his attacks on the poor, Stephen Harper is not a nice man. He just is not a nice man!"

And I thought - boy what a sleaze you are, Dryden. Because this kind of political bullshit is what I hate most about politics, and it's about all the Liberals can do these days, about all they've been able to come up with for many years in fact. Stephen Harper is not a nice man. Really? Because he cut less than 1% from the arts? Hitler gave a lot of money to the arts. Was he a nice man? Stalin gave tons of money to the arts. The Chinese spent billions on the Olympics. They must REALLY be nice.

But maybe it's his concern for the poor. After all, guys like Dryden, who never worked a day in his life, a multi-millionaire who made his money playing a game, who has never had to worry for a moment about paying bills, must have a lot of empathy for the poor - unlike Stephan Harper, who actually, well, you know, worked for a living.

Say, do you think Dryden is worried about how the Liberal tax on home heating oil will affect his ability to heat his mansion? I expect not too much.

And then I thought about Jean Chretien, who got angry during a protest, stormed down off a stage, marched into the crowd, grabbed some little guy half his size by the throat, shook him like a rag doll and flung him aside, breaking his glasses. Nice guy that Jean Chretien.

And I thought about Paul Martin Junior, who was notorious for red-faced screaming fits when he was angry about something. He'd get right in the face of some poor underling and scream so loudly spittle would get on the poor schmuck's face. Nice guy that Paul Martin.

Stephan Harper is not a nice man. That apparently is what the empty suits like Dryden have been given as talking points to say in front of crowds by what passes for a Liberal brain trust, probably to try and distract them from the Liberals' idiotic platform, and their whiny, incomprehensible leader who can't make decisions.

I don't know if Stephan Harper is a nice man or not, never having spent a lot of time around him. And I bet a backbench nonentity like Dryden hasn't spent any more time in his presence than I have. I think I can say with some confidence though, that Ken Dryden is not an honest man. He's just not. But then, he's a Liberal, and none of them are.

And some people are really going to vote for these guys?

[guyser]

I agree.

[capricorn]

Good post Argus.

I don't want a "nice" man running my country's government. I also don't want a Prime Minister who thinks he is my father. I want my Prime Minister to respect my tax dollars and who spends taxpayers' money wisely. I want a Prime Minister who will keep the government as far away from me as possible. I want a Prime Minister that is ruthless enough to cut useless and intrusive programs yet caring enough that the less fortunate get a break. I want a Prime Minister that will let me make my own mistakes and not come to my rescue every time I screw up. Please, let me sail my own ship.

Why didn't Ken Dryden become a sports commentator like a lot of ex-athletes do? Because it's easier and more profitable to collect an MPs salary. It must eat him up that Harper is researching and writing a book on hockey. Suck on that Dryden.

[Argus]

Good post Argus.

I don't want a "nice" man running my country's government.

I don't have anything against nice men. I think it's a false belief that you can't be both nice, and tough. I don't know if Harper is a nice man or not, but he seems to be a strong, decisive man, and Dion, for all he appears nice enough, doesn't seem to be strong or decisive. And I value those, frankly, more than being "nice".

My point, though, is that Dryden doesn't know if Harper is nice or not. Certainly the reasons he gave were BS. It's a talking point he got from the party, and he's repeating it like the trained seal he is.

How about - "We disagree with his policy of doing this" How about. "We believe that his policy of doing that is misguided, or will not work, or will will not benefit enough people".

Some people on the left think the best way to alleviate poverty is by giving away money. Harper and most others on the right think the best way to help alleviate poverty is by making the business environment profitable so companies will expand and hire more workers. These are both legitimate political views. And to say that one is noble and the other mean or cruel is simply crass political bullshit. You're a federal politician. If you disagree with the other party the intelligent thing to do is to explain what about their policy you disagree with and why, not to shout "Meanie! Meanie!" at them. I mean, Jesus, how childish and stupid.

[Canadian Blue]

Watch out for this attack ad soon to come from the LPC.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=6QjOI7bj5ks

[capricorn]

I don't have anything against nice men.

Neither do I. I know nice men who are alcoholics.

Some people on the left think the best way to alleviate poverty is by giving away money. Harper and most others on the right think the best way to help alleviate poverty is by making the business environment profitable so companies will expand and hire more workers. These are both legitimate political views.

Of course they are. As a former Liberal supporter, I thought government money could solve all the problems. I realized that was my money they were doling out hither and yon without results. I thought it was time to give another party a crack at addressing our country's problems and I switched to the Conservatives.

And to say that one is noble and the other mean or cruel is simply crass political bullshit. You're a federal politician. If you disagree with the other party the intelligent thing to do is to explain what about their policy you disagree with and why, not to shout "Meanie! Meanie!" at them. I mean, Jesus, how childish and stupid.

The reason Harper is leading in the polls is that many Canadians are not buying the NDP and Liberal policies. This is a disaster for the left and the only ammunition left in the arsenal is to demonize the opponent. I think Canadians are too smart to fall for it, as they did in 2004.

[Alta4ever]

Watched a clip on the news tonight featuring Ken Dryden. You might remember him as a hockey player who then retired and has been making money as a pretend MP ever since. I can't, for the life of me, remember him actually ever doing or accomplishing anything or saying anything of note since elected, but never mind. There he was on stage, talking in an oh-so-earnest voice about Stephan Harper, and he said "We've been watching Stephen Harper for more than two years now, and if there's one thing we've come to understand, with his arts cuts and his attacks on the poor, Stephen Harper is not a nice man. He just is not a nice man!"

And I thought - boy what a sleaze you are, Dryden. Because this kind of political bullshit is what I hate most about politics, and it's about all the Liberals can do these days, about all they've been able to come up with for many years in fact. Stephen Harper is not a nice man. Really? Because he cut less than 1% from the arts? Hitler gave a lot of money to the arts. Was he a nice man? Stalin gave tons of money to the arts. The Chinese spent billions on the Olympics. They must REALLY be nice.

But maybe it's his concern for the poor. After all, guys like Dryden, who never worked a day in his life, a multi-millionaire who made his money playing a game, who has never had to worry for a moment about paying bills, must have a lot of empathy for the poor - unlike Stephan Harper, who actually, well, you know, worked for a living.

Say, do you think Dryden is worried about how the Liberal tax on home heating oil will affect his ability to heat his mansion? I expect not too much.

And then I thought about Jean Chretien, who got angry during a protest, stormed down off a stage, marched into the crowd, grabbed some little guy half his size by the throat, shook him like a rag doll and flung him aside, breaking his glasses. Nice guy that Jean Chretien.

And I thought about Paul Martin Junior, who was notorious for red-faced screaming fits when he was angry about something. He'd get right in the face of some poor underling and scream so loudly spittle would get on the poor schmuck's face. Nice guy that Paul Martin.

Stephan Harper is not a nice man. That apparently is what the empty suits like Dryden have been given as talking points to say in front of crowds by what passes for a Liberal brain trust, probably to try and distract them from the Liberals' idiotic platform, and their whiny, incomprehensible leader who can't make decisions.

I don't know if Stephan Harper is a nice man or not, never having spent a lot of time around him. And I bet a backbench nonentity like Dryden hasn't spent any more time in his presence than I have. I think I can say with some confidence though, that Ken Dryden is not an honest man. He's just not. But then, he's a Liberal, and none of them are.

And some people are really going to vote for these guys?

Great Post

[independent]

Ken Dryden was one of the liberal leadership candidates and has served in cabinet. What he says carries a lot of weight. He came out and said the obvious. Harper should have stuck with the tough leader image it suited him better. It is always better to present your best attributes. You try to change your image for an election people are going to read right through it.

[Who's Doing What?]

Not a nice man?

IF you have watched any of the question periods in the HoC since he has been in power you would see that statement is not giving him enough credit. Harper and his inner circle behave like a bunch of spineless schoolyard bullies who whenever caught rat out the other guy for doing something similar.

"B-b-b-but the Liberals....." Puh-lease!

I think saying "He is not a nice man." is flattering for Harper, considering his and his party's actions since taking power.

[Alta4ever]

Not a nice man?

IF you have watched any of the question periods in the HoC since he has been in power you would see that statement is not giving him enough credit. Harper and his inner circle behave like a bunch of spineless schoolyard bullies who whenever caught rat out the other guy for doing something similar.

"B-b-b-but the Liberals....." Puh-lease!

I think saying "He is not a nice man." is flattering for Harper, considering his and his party's actions since taking power.

Please, just because the liberals didn't have any spine to go to the commons and vote doesn't make Harper a bully it just showed that the liberals were willing to sell out their party base in hopes of being able to wait it out until their appoval numers improved, just to get caught with their pants down.

Harper has never struck or strangled a protestor. (Something a certain Liberal PM did)

Or Given the finger to members of the public in western Canada (something another Liberal PM Did)

Edited October 2, 2008 by Alta4ever

[independent]

Please, just because the liberals didn't have any spine to go to the commons and vote doesn't make Harper a bully it just showed that the liberals were willing to sell out their party base in hopes of being able to wait it out until their appoval numers improved, just to get caught with their pants down.

Harper has never struck or strangled a protestor. (Something a certain Liberal PM did)

Or Given the finger to members of the public in western Canada (something another Liberal PM Did)

The Liberals did the right thing. They respected the Canadian voter. The public voted in Harper and he deserved a chance to govern. The public does not want an election every couple of years. Of course if the Canadian public started to want a change they would have voted against Harper. Do you think the Canadian public wanted a change? What party would be stupid enough to call an election at this time when the public clearly did not want one? Why would the Liberals want to go to the polls just to get another minority government that was working perfectly fine the way it was.

[eyeball]

Harper's supporters seem a lot meaner than Harper himself. The fact he's willing to stand up and actually represent them is what I don't like about him.

[Argus]

Not a nice man?

IF you have watched any of the question periods in the HoC since he has been in power you would see that statement is not giving him enough credit. Harper and his inner circle behave like a bunch of spineless schoolyard bullies who whenever caught rat out the other guy for doing something similar.

Sorry, I'm not ignorant, so this bit of drivel only serves to irritate me.

I used to go down to the House prior to television and sit in the galleries to watch question period. I watched the Liberals under Trudeau, the Mulroney and Clark Tories, and Chretien. Basically, the level of politeness and respect within the House has diminished on a nearly constant basis year after year. Chretien and his minister were scornful, derisive, mocking, and sometimes even obscene in their answers - if you could call them that - to even basic questions put to them by the Reform Party/Alliance. And I'm not talking about the two minute long questions I see the Liberals and NDP asking now, questions which are loaded with insults and accusations and scorn. I'm talking about simple, polite questions.

But that never bothered you one little bit. Probably didn't even notice, did you? Because you don't think there's anything wrong with heaping abuse on right wingers. You probably don't even notice it.

But now, suddenly, Harper is a bully for not treating the opposition with respect?

"B-b-b-but the Liberals....." Puh-lease!

Well you see, unlike you (clearly) I have a problem with the hypocrisy of a party which does one thing for thirteen years, then turns around and squeals and whines because the other guy is doing something similar. You might sob sympathetically with them, but I just roll my eyes and shake my head at what bulllshit they and you are spouting.

Because you're every bit the hypocrite they are. You complain about the Tories doing something but then you'll eagerly get out there and vote for another party come election day which did the same in the past and will do the same in the future.

Mind you, Harper has never almost strangled a protester half his side (not mean, not mean, you'll say) or spat in the face of underlings (not mean, not mean, you'll say) and didn't try to set the police on a civil servant who dared to call in a loan to a criminal buddy of his (not mean, not mean, you'll say).

[capricorn]

Mind you, Harper has never almost strangled a protester half his side (not mean, not mean, you'll say) or spat in the face of underlings (not mean, not mean, you'll say) and didn't try to set the police on a civil servant who dared to call in a loan to a criminal buddy of his (not mean, not mean, you'll say).

I also recall Allan Cutler who blew the whistle on Adscam. Chuck Guite, bureaucrat extraordinaire, rapidly ruined his career, most probably on Chretien's and/or Martin's orders.

[betsy]

Watched a clip on the news tonight featuring Ken Dryden. You might remember him as a hockey player who then retired and has been making money as a pretend MP ever since. I can't, for the life of me, remember him actually ever doing or accomplishing anything or saying anything of note since elected, but never mind. There he was on stage, talking in an oh-so-earnest voice about Stephan Harper, and he said "We've been watching Stephen Harper for more than two years now, and if there's one thing we've come to understand, with his arts cuts and his attacks on the poor, Stephen Harper is not a nice man. He just is not a nice man!"

And I thought - boy what a sleaze you are, Dryden. Because this kind of political bullshit is what I hate most about politics, and it's about all the Liberals can do these days, about all they've been able to come up with for many years in fact. Stephen Harper is not a nice man. Really? Because he cut less than 1% from the arts? Hitler gave a lot of money to the arts. Was he a nice man? Stalin gave tons of money to the arts. The Chinese spent billions on the Olympics. They must REALLY be nice.

But maybe it's his concern for the poor. After all, guys like Dryden, who never worked a day in his life, a multi-millionaire who made his money playing a game, who has never had to worry for a moment about paying bills, must have a lot of empathy for the poor - unlike Stephan Harper, who actually, well, you know, worked for a living.

Say, do you think Dryden is worried about how the Liberal tax on home heating oil will affect his ability to heat his mansion? I expect not too much.

And then I thought about Jean Chretien, who got angry during a protest, stormed down off a stage, marched into the crowd, grabbed some little guy half his size by the throat, shook him like a rag doll and flung him aside, breaking his glasses. Nice guy that Jean Chretien.

And I thought about Paul Martin Junior, who was notorious for red-faced screaming fits when he was angry about something. He'd get right in the face of some poor underling and scream so loudly spittle would get on the poor schmuck's face. Nice guy that Paul Martin.

Stephan Harper is not a nice man. That apparently is what the empty suits like Dryden have been given as talking points to say in front of crowds by what passes for a Liberal brain trust, probably to try and distract them from the Liberals' idiotic platform, and their whiny, incomprehensible leader who can't make decisions.

I don't know if Stephan Harper is a nice man or not, never having spent a lot of time around him. And I bet a backbench nonentity like Dryden hasn't spent any more time in his presence than I have. I think I can say with some confidence though, that Ken Dryden is not an honest man. He's just not. But then, he's a Liberal, and none of them are.

And some people are really going to vote for these guys?

Very well said.

[Alta4ever]

The Liberals did the right thing. They respected the Canadian voter. The public voted in Harper and he deserved a chance to govern. The public does not want an election every couple of years. Of course if the Canadian public started to want a change they would have voted against Harper.

Its a minority parliment in fact this was the longest running minority parliment, they are not suppose to last 4 years. Its only a majority the lasts that long. So here is something to consider, if you don't want another election in the next couple of years, give the tories a majority, or stop whining about about the naturally short nature of minority governments.

[Argus]

The Liberals did the right thing. They respected the Canadian voter. The public voted in Harper and he deserved a chance to govern.

Do you really believe that crap? They "respected" the voter? The Liberals would have brought down the government the instant the polls showed they had a decent chance of winning. In fact, every time the polls pushed them up Dion started getting braver and threatening to vote down government legsislation. I'm sure everyone else here can remember several times when he threatened to do this because polls were favorable - then backed down when subsequent polls showed them slumping. The only thing the federal Liberals respect is power. And the instant they thought they could have won it back we'd have been into an election. Anyone who has watched them for more than one or two elections surely knows that.

Jesus, remember how short-lived Clark's government was? Do you think the Liberals "respected" the electorate's choice then? Or, for that matter, then NDP? It was an NDP motion that brought Clark's government down, after all, by one Bob Rae.

[Oleg Bach]

Do you really believe that crap? They "respected" the voter? The Liberals would have brought down the government the instant the polls showed they had a decent chance of winning. In fact, every time the polls pushed them up Dion started getting braver and threatening to vote down government legsislation. I'm sure everyone else here can remember several times when he threatened to do this because polls were favorable - then backed down when subsequent polls showed them slumping. The only thing the federal Liberals respect is power. And the instant they thought they could have won it back we'd have been into an election. Anyone who has watched them for more than one or two elections surely knows that.

Jesus, remember how short-lived Clark's government was? Do you think the Liberals "respected" the electorate's choice then? Or, for that matter, then NDP? It was an NDP motion that brought Clark's government down, after all, by one Bob Rae.

Respect is the mutual transphere of power and the liberals have no respect for anyone even themsleves - Once they have so called power they will not have a clue what to do with it other then pander - Look at same sex marriage - which in reality is no-sex marriage - you have to have opposites in order to constitute sex...the liberals are like milk poured in water that that has the same look of Dions skin and character.... There will come a time when liberals will say that child porno is art and to interfere with the exploitation of children is a strike against their human rights - they are nuts!

[jbg]

I don't know if Stephan Harper is a nice man or not, never having spent a lot of time around him. And I bet a backbench nonentity like Dryden hasn't spent any more time in his presence than I have. I think I can say with some confidence though, that Ken Dryden is not an honest man. He's just not. But then, he's a Liberal, and none of them are.

And some people are really going to vote for these guys?

Excellent post. Harper strikes me as "straightforward" more than "nice". If I were a Canadian I'd like his relative transparent clarity.

He's not perfect, but probably the best PM Canada's had, except maybe Macdonald when sober.

[jbg]

Dion promised that the Green Shaft Green Shift would be "revenue neutral. Thankfully, from the looks of this debate you'll never get a chance to find out.

[jbg]

Its a minority parliment in fact this was the longest running minority parliment, they are not suppose to last 4 years.

Good point but I believe this is the second-longest.

[kimmy]

Excellent post. Harper strikes me as "straightforward" more than "nice". If I were a Canadian I'd like his relative transparent clarity.

He's not perfect, but probably the best PM Canada's had, except maybe Macdonald when sober.

I don't know that he's earned that distinction after 3 years of merely adequate government.

However, I think he's head and shoulders above his contemporaries. And, as I said earlier in the week, I think he has saved federalism in Canada. This would be an irreparably broken regional landscape without Harper.

-k

[August1991]

And I thought - boy what a sleaze you are, Dryden. Because this kind of political bullshit is what I hate most about politics, and it's about all the Liberals can do these days, about all they've been able to come up with for many years in fact. Stephen Harper is not a nice man. Really?

One of your better rants, Argus. I've thought about it since I read it.

I'm not bothered that Ken Dryden described Harper as "not a nice man". I'm not bothered that Dryden is a remarkably boring person who has no financial concerns because of his odd physical skills. I'm not even botered by the fact that he lived in Montreal for many years and yet can't speak understandable French.

I am bothered by bland platitudes. To describe someone as "not nice" is an utterly useless description. It's kitsch. It hopes to mean something to everyone and just means nothing at all.

I saw the same in both the French and English debates, most often from Layton but also from May and in fact all of them. I was saddened when the moderator asked in the Englsih debate whether the jobs lost in manufacturing would ever come back. Layton, May and Duceppe all argued that the government must ensure we have manufacturing jobs.

No one knows exactly what "manufacturing jobs" are or why taxpayers should give money to have them. We are in the world of kitsch.

Ken Dryden is a kitsch politician stating bland platitudes. And that's how we now want our politicians, in the same way that local TV stations choose the cute blonde to be the weatherperson.

----

Last point. The average Canadian will pay annually about two or three or more in federal tax than they pay for their their car (insurance, gas, lease, loan payments or foregone interest earned).

Yet, most spend far more time researching and choosing a car than they do researching and choosing a political party. Many choose politicians through bland platitudes. A quick glance through Internet car forums will show that many more buy cars differently.

What does it say about a society where people choose their cars far more carefully than they choose their politicians?

[guyser]

What does it say about a society where people choose their cars far more carefully than they choose their politicians?

It doesnt say anything when one spends everyday with the car but rarely come into any contact with a politician.

Personal tangible items will have people spending time researching to some degree. The immediate effect IMO is the reason.

Not to mention the powerless and helpless feeling many have for politics observed by the numbers who vote.

[Oleg Bach]

"He who constantly seeks the approval of his fellow man become a slave" Should Harper be a "nice guy" and have EVERYBODY like him? Very few people like me and some believe I am not a nice guy because I have a doctrine and a sense of principle - People in liberal society do not like law and order...I do - as long as Harper does not show a sadistic nature towards those he is elected to server - then I have no problem if he is nice or not - as long as he is right.